UNIT 2.

2
THE REGULATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING

CONTENTS
• The Regulation of Professional
Engineering
• The Requirements for Engaging in the
Practice of Professional Engineering
This downloadable version of Unit 2.2 • Preventing Others from Engaging in
contains edited content. To get the full the Practice of Professional
Engineering
experience of this course and all of its
• Professional Conduct for Practitioners
content (including additional interactive
of Professional Engineering
content and assignments), you are • Clauses
encouraged to engage with the course • Dealing with Professional Misconduct
through LEARN. • Penalties that May be Imposed by the
Discipline Committee

UNIT 2 LEARNING OUTCOMES

• Recognize engineering as a self-regulating practice in Canada through knowledge
of the Professional Engineers Act, Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO), and
Ontario Regulation 941.
• Describe the roles and responsibilities of professional engineers.
• Describe the purpose and target groups of PEO’s code of ethics, including
employers, their clients, other professionals, and other practitioners of
professional engineering.
• Identify unethical actions and corresponding clauses according to PEO’s definition
of Professional Misconduct in Section 72 of Ontario Regulation 941.

UNIT 2 ASSESSMENT
• Assignment 1: Professional Practice Quiz

1
© University of Waterloo and others
 LEARN

THE REGULATION OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING

The PEA authorizes PEO to regulate engineering by allowing PEO to regulate specific aspects of the
practice of engineering. Some aspects of those regulations are specified in the Act itself, but an Act of
Parliament requires discussion and a vote by the Provincial Parliament of Ontario. Because Members of
the Provincial Parliament may not have the expertise or the time to react in a timely fashion, the Act also
allows for PEO to author additional regulations; Section 7 of the PEA enumerates those areas related to
engineering that PEO can regulate. These regulations are published in a document called Ontario
Regulation 941 (O.Reg. 941), but before any changes are made to these regulations, the changes must be
approved by a member of the Ontario Cabinet, specifically, the Attorney General.1

If PEO is expected to regulate the practice of professional engineering, between the PEA and O.Reg. 941,
some of the required conditions must include:
1. A definition of the practice of professional engineering.
2. The requirements for engaging in the practice of professional engineering.
3. A list of offences if non-practitioners engage in the practice of professional engineering.
4. For authorized practitioners, a description of what is considered professional conduct.
5. A specification of the mechanisms for dealing with professional engineers who fail to live up the
expected conduct.
6. A description of possible penalties that may be applied to professional engineers who fail to live
up to the expected conduct.

We will describe each of these, starting with the definition of professional engineering.

1. A DEFINITION OF THE PRACTICE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING

First, the PEA alone defines the practice of engineering as being any act of

1. planning,
2. designing,
3. composing,
4. evaluating,
5. advising,
6. reporting,
7. directing, or

1
As a professional engineer, you will work with many Acts of Parliament (be they provincial or federal), and most of
these Acts will designate authority to various associations or organizations, and those groups, too, will be able to
author and enforce regulations. These regulations have the same weight as the Acts themselves.
2
© University of Waterloo and others
 8. supervising

that requires the application of engineering principles and concerns the safeguarding of
1. life,
2. health,
3. property,
4. economic interests,
5. the public welfare, or
6. the environment,

or the managing of any such act. We will now continue by looking at how PEO identifies those who can
engage in this practice.

2. THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGAGING IN THE PRACTICE OF

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING

The means by which PEO regulates who is authorized to practice professional engineering is through the
issuance of professional engineering licences. In Section 14 of the PEA, there are some requirements
regarding who can receive a licence to practice professional engineering, including being 18 years old and
of “good character;”2 however, the act defers to PEO the decision as to what the appropriate academic
and experience requirements are, so these are defined in O.Reg. 941 in Section 33 Licensing requirements.

When a person is granted a licence, that person is permitted to practice professional engineering in any
field of engineering that person feels competent to practice. Thus, a graduate from a civil engineering
program who practiced for a decade as a civil engineer could never-the-less practice as a computer
engineer if that person had subsequently spent evenings and weekends learning the relevant subject
matter of computer software and hardware design. The justification for this is that PEO does not believe
that it is necessary to micro-manage its licence holders, and instead gives the licence holder the onus of
ensuring that the holder restricts practice to where that holder is competent. It would, however, be
unprofessional for a professional engineer to engage in a field of engineering in which the individual does
not have the relevant expertise.

There are other classifications of licences defined in the PEA including “temporary”, “provisional” and
“limited”. These licenses are associated with additional restrictions, but are beyond the scope of this
course.

Licence holders can offer their services as professional engineers in one of two means:
1. The engineer can sign an employment contract with a company and thus provide engineering
services to that employer. Such an engineer is said to be an employee-engineer.
2. The engineer can take on clients, meaning entering into contracts with either a person or a
business for a specific project, and when that project is finished, the business relationship with
that client ends. Such an engineer or business that offers engineering services to clients is said to

2
Note: up until 2010, another requirement was that the person be a Canadian citizen. As this was deemed by the
legislature to be unnecessarily restrictive, it was dropped by in an amendment to the PEA in the Open for Business
Act of 2010.
3
© University of Waterloo and others
 be providing such services to the public. An engineer who provides services to the public is said to
be a consulting engineer.

It is much more difficult to provide engineering services to the public, as more work is required in entering
into the contracts, and ensuring that the final design or report meet the needs of the client at the time it
is delivered. This is why such designs or reports are required to be sealed, signed and dated by a
professional engineer using a professional engineer’s seal, something that an employee-engineer may
seldom ever do. However, some issues arose often enough that they needed to be dealt with:

1. If an engineer did not have insurance and an error was made that harmed the client financially or
otherwise, the client could have sued the engineer to recover costs, but the engineer could also
declare bankruptcy leaving the client to deal with those costs.
2. If multiple professional engineers were working on an engineering product for a client and an
error is made, there was on occasion significant finger-pointing and it would have been difficult
to determine who was responsible for the error.

Consequently, the Province of Ontario is the only jurisdiction in Canada that currently also requires a
Certificate of Authorization for a professional engineer or business to offer engineering services to the
public. This exact wording is found in Section 12(2) of the PEA, which says:

No person shall offer to the public or engage in the business of providing to the public
services that are within the practice of professional engineering except under and in
accordance with a certificate of authorization.

The requirements for a Certificate of Authorization are:

1. The PEA in Section 17(1) requires that the services provided by the holder of a Certificate of
Authorization must have those services supervised by a Professional Engineer, but defers the
details to the regulations. O.Reg. 941 specifies in Section 47.1 that the application for a Certificate
of Authorization requires a list of Professional Engineers who will supervise and be held
accountable for all provided engineering services.
2. The PEA in Section 34 requires that the holder of a Certificate of Authorization has insurance, but
defers the details to the regulations. O.Reg. 941 specifies the required insurance in Section 74.

You don’t have to memorize the section numbers, but rather, we want you to understand how the Act
and the regulations are related.

From here on, we will always refer to holders of licences or certificates as practitioners.

3. PREVENTING OTHERS FROM ENGAGING IN THE PRACTICE OF

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING

The PEA specifies penalties for individuals who practice professional engineering without such a licence
or Certificate of Authorization, including fines. When a judge of the Superior Court of Justice finds an
individual or corporation guilty of practicing professional engineering without a licence or Certificate of
Authorization, they may impose penalties and fines in accordance with the PEA. The court may also order

4
© University of Waterloo and others
the individual or corporation to stop engaging in the practice of professional engineering. Breaching that
order may find the party to be guilty of contempt of court, a crime that may also include jail terms.

4. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FOR PRACTITIONERS OF PROFESSIONAL

ENGINEERING
Because the practice of professional engineer requires the safeguarding of at least one of the six identified
target objectives (see Condition 1), it is possible that an error may result in, for example, physical harm or
death, harm to the environment, or financial harm to a person or corporation. If you correctly apply the
principles of engineering design and judgement in your practice, it is unlikely that harm will be the result;
however, a failure on your part may subsequently cause harm. If that failure could have been avoided, it
is likely that you would be engaging in unprofessional behavior, or in other words, you would have been
engaging in professional misconduct. Item 7(1)21 in the PEA requires that PEO define conduct that is
deemed to be unprofessional in the regulations, and Section 28(2) of the PEA dictates how a practitioner
may be found guilty of professional misconduct.

Professional misconduct is described in Section 72 of O.Reg. 941. This list has been modified to from time-
to-time as has been deemed necessary by PEO, but all such changes have been approved by the Attorney
General of Ontario. Under the heading of “Professional misconduct—definition”, Section 72 is broken
onto two parts. 72(1) gives definitions to two terms used in 72(2), namely, what specifically is considered
to be harassment, and what is negligence. The definition of these two words are:

PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT – DEFINITION

72. (1) In this section,
“harassment” means engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought
reasonably to be known as unwelcome and that might reasonably be regarded as interfering in a
professional engineering relationship;
“negligence” means an act or an omission in the carrying out of the work of a practitioner that
constitutes a failure to maintain the standards that a reasonable and prudent practitioner would
maintain in the circumstances.

The next part lists (current as of March 2019) fourteen behaviors that are considered unprofessional
conduct. These include:

(2) For the purposes of the Act and this Regulation, “professional misconduct” means,
(a) negligence,
(b) failure to make reasonable provision for the safeguarding of life, health or property of a person
who may be affected by the work for which the practitioner is responsible,
(c) failure to act to correct or report a situation that the practitioner believes may endanger the
safety or the welfare of the public,
(d) failure to make responsible provision for complying with applicable statutes, regulations,
standards, codes, by-laws and rules in connection with work being undertaken by or under the
responsibility of the practitioner,
(e) signing, dating or sealing an engineering document, or failing to do one or more of them, in
contravention of section 53,
5
© University of Waterloo and others
 (f) failure of a practitioner to present clearly to the practitioner’s employer the consequences to be
expected from a deviation proposed in work, if the professional engineering judgment of the
practitioner is overruled by non-technical authority in cases where the practitioner is responsible
for the technical adequacy of professional engineering work,
(g) breach of the Act or regulations, other than an action that is solely a breach of the code of ethics,
(h) undertaking work the practitioner is not competent to perform by virtue of the practitioner’s
training and experience,
(i) failure to make prompt, voluntary and complete disclosure of an interest, direct or indirect, that
might in any way be, or be construed as, prejudicial to the professional judgment of the
practitioner in rendering service to the public, to an employer or to a client, and in particular,
without limiting the generality of the foregoing, carrying out any of the following acts without
making such a prior disclosure:
i. Accepting compensation in any form for a particular service from more than one party.
ii. Submitting a tender or acting as a contractor in respect of work upon which the
practitioner may be performing as a professional engineer.
iii. Participating in the supply of material or equipment to be used by the employer or client
of the practitioner.
iv. Contracting in the practitioner’s own right to perform professional engineering services
for other than the practitioner’s employer.
v. Expressing opinions or making statements concerning matters within the practice of
professional engineering of public interest where the opinions or statements are inspired
or paid for by other interests,
(j) conduct or an act relevant to the practice of professional engineering that, having regard to all
the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by the engineering profession as disgraceful,
dishonourable or unprofessional,
(k) failure by a practitioner to abide by the terms, conditions or limitations of the practitioner’s
licence, provisional licence, limited licence, temporary licence or certificate,
(l) failure to supply documents or information requested by an investigator acting under section 33
of the Act,
(m) permitting, counselling or assisting a person who is not a practitioner to engage in the practice of
professional engineering except as provided for in the Act or the regulations,
(n) harassment.

In this course and on the Professional Practice Examination (PPE), you will be required to identify
unprofessional behavior. When you do so, it is insufficient to simply point out what the unprofessional
behavior was; instead, you must also identify exactly which clause defines that behavior as being
unprofessional. For example, if your subordinate submitted to you a design for you to seal so that it
can be passed onto the client, if you were to seal, sign and date that design without checking it, you
would be guilty of professional misconduct under 72(2)(e). Be sure to use this format. If you write the
Professional Practice Examination, you will be required to correctly cite the appropriate definition of
professional misconduct.

We will now go through these fourteen clauses.

6
© University of Waterloo and others
CLAUSES

(a) Negligence
An engineer is not expected to be perfect, and the product need not be the most optimal product for the
client; however, an aspect of a report or design causes harm to the client and when a reasonable and
prudent engineer would not have acted in that matter, the action is said to be negligent.

For example, in inspecting a shopping mall to determine if the structure was safe, if you were to simply
look at the veneer-covered walls and ceilings and observe that there are no water stains or protrusions
and conclude that everything was “okay” underneath, this would be negligent behavior, as a reasonable
engineer would have tried to inspect the underlying girders and concrete walls.

As another example, in designing the foundation for a barn, if you were lazy and required eight times as
many reinforcing bars (rebar) in the foundation as was actually necessary simply because it was easier to
overestimate how much rebar was required rather than making a more reasonable calculation may cost
the farmer an additional $20,000. This would economically harm the farmer, and if a reasonable and
prudent engineer would have more carefully determined the correct amount of rebar, you would be guilty
of negligence.

(b) Failure to make reasonable provision…

When an engineer completes a report or design, it is not just necessary to consider the stated needs of
the client or employer, because the product of the engineer may affect many people beyond just the
client or employer. It is up to the engineer to make sure that the product is safe for anyone who may be
affected by it.

For example, suppose you designed a component of an aircraft that, under normal conditions, is fixed to
outside of the aircraft, but where it is possible that component may come loose. If that component was
made of a very hard metal, it may puncture the tire of another aircraft. Thus, while this hard metal
component may satisfy all the requirements of your client, if it subsequently harms another aircraft by
puncturing its tires while it is trying to take off, you would be responsible for not having not made
reasonable provisions for ensuring the component did not harm others.

(c) Failure to act when observing a dangerous situation

When an engineer engaging in the practice of professional engineering observes something that is
dangerous but does nothing to report or correct it, even if that engineer is not responsible for the
situation, the engineer must nevertheless ensure that steps are made to remove the danger. This may be
something not related to your specific report or design, whereas the previous clause discusses failures in
your reports or designs.

For example, if you as a civil engineer are inspecting some component of a new building that is being built
in downtown Toronto, and you notice that one part of the scaffolding was not secured to the building in
question, you would be guilty of failing to report a dangerous situation.

Note that this does not apply when an engineer is not practicing. For example, an engineer who is driving
home from work on the highway and notices pieces of concrete on the ground under a bridge, while it
may be ethical to report this, it is not professional misconduct to not report it.

7
© University of Waterloo and others
(d) Failure to comply with applicable laws
While you must always seek to satisfy all the requirements of your client or employer, you also have an
obligation to keep up to date with all statues, regulations, standards, codes, by-laws and rules that may
affect your work.

For example, you have designed an antenna for a cellular phone; however, in the last year, a government
regulation regarding power output has been strengthened. You use a bookmarked reference to a copy of
an older version of those regulations, so your device is not compliant with the current regulations. You
are therefore guilty of professional misconduct, as you should have kept abreast with the most recent
regulatory changes relevant to your field.

(e) Failure to check before sealing

You cannot, as an engineer, seal another person’s final engineering documents without checking them
yourself.

For example, a friend allowed his licence to lapse, and thus cannot provide engineering services to a client
for whom he used to regularly provide services. That friend could, however, offer you $500 to sign his
report so that he can pass it on to his client. If you simply trusted your friend and sealed, signed and dated
that report without verifying its contents to be correct, you would be guilty of professional misconduct
and if the client were to sue, you would be liable.

(f) Failure to inform on consequences

Managers and executives are usually looking to reduce costs, and as a consequence, they may suggest
changes to engineering designs that may affect the adequacy of the final product. If the engineer does
not put in writing the reasons why the change is not appropriate, and that change consequence causes
harm, the engineer is still responsible for the change.

For example, suppose that a feature is critical for the safety of a product, but your senior manager would
like that feature to be optional and only available at an additional cost. Knowing that there will be
purchasers who choose to not include the feature, and thus be unnecessarily be put in harm’s way, you
would be not only obligated to inform your senior manager that this is inappropriate, you would also be
obligated to put this in writing.

(g) Breach of the Act or regulations

An engineer must comply with all aspects of the PEA and all regulations produced by PEO. The one
exception, and we will discuss this later, is the Code of Ethics. This is because the Code of Ethics in Ontario
is a suggested code, but breaching that code does not necessarily mean that the engineer is actually
engaged in professional misconduct. This allows the code to have more suggestions as to how to act,
suggested behaviors that could not under any reasonable circumstance be enforceable.

For example, if, once you get your licence, you start offering professional engineering services to the
public without a Certificate of Authorization; you would be guilty of professional misconduct. This has
happened; however, the consequences need not be severe. One Professional Engineer in Ontario did offer
such services to the public, and each time the services were of the quality one would expect from a
professional engineer, only he did not have a Certificate of Authorization. He was found guilty of
professional misconduct, but the penalty was waived if he acquired a Certificate of Authorization in a

8
© University of Waterloo and others
specified time. The Professional Engineer acquired the certificate and continued to offer his services to
the public.

(h) Lack of competence

As a professional engineer, you must always restrict your practice to fields in which you have sufficient
current training and knowledge.

For example, suppose you graduate as an electrical engineer, but you never really paid attention the
course material in the power engineering courses. Then, when you leave one job and are looking for
another, a friend working at Ontario Power Generation suggests you apply there. Your friend gives you a
great recommendation and tutors you as to how to respond to interview questions. Once you start
working, you are suddenly outside your expertise. If you were to continue to work like this, you would be
guilty of professional misconduct.

Similarly, if your friend’s place of worship needed to install a wheelchair ramp that is in a public place, and
you think “this can’t be that hard”, so you come up with a design that you mostly got from Internet
sources. If your design is good, no one may even notice your faux pas; however, if there are any issues
with the design and someone is harmed because, for example, the gradient is too steep, you would likely
be found guilty of professional misconduct.

(i) Conflict of interest

A conflict of interest occurs when a decision the engineer makes may subsequently enrich that engineer
in some other way other than the immediate contract in question. We will look more closely at conflict of
interest in the case studies.

(j) Conduct unbecoming

Sometimes, it is just too difficult to pin down exactly what was done wrong, but the behavior was
obviously disgraceful, dishonorable or unprofessional. This is, in a sense, a catch-all.

For example, if you were to appear at a political rally and began screaming racial or ethnic obscenities
while being recorded; and if you were subsequently identified publicly as being a professional engineer,
this may be sufficient to find you guilty of professional misconduct.

(k) Conduct abide by terms, conditions or limitations

In some cases, PEO may impose additional terms, conditions or limitations of a practitioner’s licence or
Certificate of Authorization. Ignoring such constraints would be considered professional misconduct.

For example, a Professional Engineer who was found guilty of professional misconduct may have, as a
penalty, the requirement that another Professional Engineer must check any design before it is passed on
to a client. Such checks do not come cheap, costing upwards of $1000, so the Professional Engineer may
choose to skip this step. If this becomes known, the Professional Engineer in question may be subject to
additional penalties.

(l) Failure to supply documentation

Failure to supply documentation when PEO is investigating a possible occurrence of professional
misconduct is itself professional misconduct.

9
© University of Waterloo and others
(m) Aiding in the practice of a non-practitioner
Permitting, counselling or assisting a person who is not a practitioner to engage in the practice of
professional engineering is professional misconduct.

For example, your good friend from undergraduate studies made a few mistakes under pressure and
subsequently that friend’s licence was revoked. If you were to aid that friend by allowing that friend to
use your stamp, you would be guilty of professional misconduct.

(n) Harassment
You are not allowed to harass others while on the job.

This clause was added after a female Professional Engineer was harassed by colleagues during the
restoration of the Parliament Buildings of Canada. At the time, this clause was not in the definition of
professional misconduct, and some of the Professional Engineers in question were found not guilty of
professional misconduct. The only clause that may have been used is 72(2)j. Following this, O.Reg. 941
was changed to include harassment.

In summary, O.Reg. 941 gives a comprehensive list of behaviors that are unacceptable for practitioners to
engage in. Next, we will look at how PEO responds when a practitioner does engage in professional
misconduct.

5. DEALING WITH PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT

For practitioners who fail to live up to the standards set by PEO, the mechanism for dealing with such
practitioners is described in the PEA and has two steps. First, any member of the public may file a
complaint against a practitioner to PEO. That complaint is heard by the Complaints Committee within PEO,
the composition and duties of which are described in Sections 23 and 24 of the PEA. The committee will
make reasonable efforts to examine any records in question regarding the complaint and will then hold a
hearing, during which the committee may make one of two decisions: they may find the complaint

1. has no merit, in which case the complaint is dropped, or

2. potentially has merit and should be referred to the Discipline Committee.

The composition and duties of the Discipline committee are described in Sections 27 and 28 of the PEA.
When a complaint is referred to this committee, the committee will invite both the complainant and the
practitioner against whom the complaint is made to provide evidence. The committee will then hold a
hearing where the complainant and lawyers representing the various parties may be present. The
committee will then make a ruling as to whether or not that practitioner is guilty of engaging in
professional misconduct. If the individual is found guilty of professional misconduct, the Discipline
Committee may then impose one or more penalties, which we will describe now.

6. PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED BY THE DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE

When a practitioner is found guilty of professional misconduct, the committee must then determine the
penalty. The possible penalties are enumerated in Section 28(4) of the PEA and allow for the committee
to impose one or more of the following:

10
© University of Waterloo and others
 (a) revoking the practitioner’s licence or certificate,
(b) suspending the practitioner’s licence or certificate but for no more than 24 months,
(c) limiting the extent to which the practitioner can practice,
(d) impose terms, conditions or limitations on the practitioner such as requiring that person to
take one or more relevant courses,
(e) imposing restrictions on the practitioner such as requiring the practitioner’s work to be
supervised by another professional engineer, not engaging in practice alone, accepting
periodic inspections of documents and records, and requiring periodic reports from the
practitioner,
(f) reprimanding, admonishing or counselling the practitioner, and possibly recording this
response,
(g) revoking or suspending designations by PEO as that practitioner being a specialist or
consulting engineer,
(h) imposing a fine no more than $5000,
(i) publishing the details and punishment of the discipline case in the Gazette either with or
without names,
(j) require the practitioner to pay the costs of the hearing, or
(k) allow for any penalty to be suspended or postponed if the practitioner completes specific
tasks such as taking specified courses or providing medical evidence that a medical or mental
incapacity related to this case has been overcome.

It is important to note that these penalties are paraphrased, so you should always refer to the PEA when
determining the full scope of possible penalties.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
• In the News:
o ‘Plenty of blame to go around,’ in Elliot Lake mall collapse, says judge
Linda Richardson, Sootoday.com, June 1, 2017
• Professional Engineers Act
• Ontario Regulation 941
• Online directory search for PEO licence holders, certificate of authorization holders and
consulting engineer designees

11
© University of Waterloo and others
 UNIT 2
SUMMARY OF THE REGULATION OF PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING IN ONTARIO

CONTENTS
• Summary of The Regulation
of Professional Engineering in
Ontario
This downloadable version of Unit 2.3
contains edited content. To get the full
experience of this course and all of its
content (including additional interactive
content and assignments), you are
encouraged to engage with the course
through LEARN.

UNIT 2 LEARNING OUTCOMES

• Recognize engineering as a self-regulating practice in Canada through knowledge
of the Professional Engineers Act, Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO), and
Ontario Regulation 941.
• Describe the roles and responsibilities of professional engineers.
• Describe the purpose and target groups of PEO’s code of ethics, including
employers, their clients, other professionals, and other practitioners of
professional engineering.
• Identify unethical actions and corresponding clauses according to PEO’s definition
of Professional Misconduct in Section 72 of Ontario Regulation 941.

UNIT 2 ASSESSMENT
• Assignment 1

12
© University of Waterloo and others
 LEARN

The PEA is the Act of the Provincial Parliament that allows for the regulation of professional engineering
in Ontario. It defines the practice of professional engineering and describes how PEO designates those
who can practice professional engineering through the issuance of licences and Certificates of
Authorization. It also defines penalties for those who practice without a licence or certificate. The PEA
allows PEO to define what is considered unprofessional conduct in the practice of engineering, provides
a mechanism for dealing with complaints about professional engineers by the public, and how to judge
those against whom complaints with merit have been made. The Act enumerates the possible penalties
that PEO is allowed to impose on practitioners found guilty of professional misconduct.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

• Complaints Against Licensed Engineers or Companies

• Making a Complaint: A Public Information Guide (PDF)
• Professional Engineering Practice (PDF) – including The Engineer’s Duty to Report on page 10
• Information about completing and filing a Complaint Form (PDF)
• Enforcement Reporting (PDF)
• Enforcement Brochure: Is this person really a professional engineer? (PDF)
• Enforcement Notices
• Complaints Review Councillor
• Fees Mediation Committee
• Discipline Tribunal

APPLY

Now that you have read the content, proceed to complete Assignment 1: Professional Practice Quiz. For
full assignment details, see the Assignment 1 page in LEARN.

13
© University of Waterloo and others